Proposal to insert provisions requiring the ADS to terminate the deactivation procedure and execute a fallback to an MRC if the user is not suitably engaged after the time available for transition has expired, to permit the ADS to terminate the deactivation procedure and resume its previous operating state in the case of user-initiated deactivation instead of a fallback to an MRC, and to require the user be promptly informed that the deactivation process has been terminated and the reason for termination.

Change request to clarify ADS response to user-initiated deactivations. Proposes to amend para. 4.2.2.3.3 to specify that for ADSF-2 systems, deactivation procedures shall only be initiated if the ADS can assess the user to be available to assume the role of the driver according to fallback user provisions in para. 4/6.2.2.1.6 a), and to renumber para. 4.2.2.3.4 as para. 4.2.2.3.3.1. The original text could be misinterpreted as requiring the ADS to initiate deactivation whenever requested by the user.

Change request to add new paragraph clarifying that an advance notification that the fallback user should prepare for a system-initiated deactivation shall not be considered as the start of the deactivation procedure. The existing text does not clearly define when a system-initiated deactivation procedure begins. Advance notification is a necessary tool to prepare the fallback user for re-engagement without prematurely starting the deactivation procedure.

Change request to establish a method to transfer vehicle control between the ADS and the user during the deactivation procedure. The ADS shall maintain safe control of the vehicle until the deactivation procedure is completed, gradually reduce its vehicle control action in response to the user assuming vehicle control, and may increase its control action if the reduction is leading to an unsafe vehicle response.

The document identifies inconsistencies between requirements in sections 6 and 7 and assessment provisions in section 8 of UN R185, including requirements without specific assessment provisions, assessment provisions without corresponding requirements, and cases with no direct mapping between requirements and assessment. The document presents examples of problematic wording differences and asks whether section 8 should be retained as-is, aligned, simplified, removed, or consolidated into other sections.

Proposal to insert a requirement that at the start of the deactivation procedure, any non-driving related activities provided or enabled by the ADS vehicle that were permitted because an ADS feature is active shall be automatically suspended. The requirement applies only to activities provided or enabled by the ADS vehicle and only to NDRA permitted because an ADS feature is active, not to activities such as listening to music or navigation permitted while an ADS feature is not active.

Proposal to amend para. 5.12. to require the manufacturer’s management system encompassing cyber security to comply with the relevant requirements of UN R155 with regard to total distance indicated and total distance values, and to require threat and associated vulnerabilities to be analysed according to the management system with regard to total distance indicated and total distance values, with proportionate mitigations implemented including or equivalent to mitigation 7 referred to in Annex 5, Part B, Table B5, threat 20.4. of UN R155. The proposal aligns odometer anti-tampering and security management requirements with UN R155 and clarifies that mitigating measures must be implemented regardless of risk value assessment.

Overview of activities under the testing sub-group for ADS regulations, covering approval, manufacturer requirements, and compliance assessment. Documents Level 1 and Level 2 requirements across virtual testing, track testing, and real-world testing environments. Identifies items not addressed in original versions, existing items requiring further consideration including safety case suitability testing and evidence generation, improvements identified during drafting GID discussions, and other items not included in previous lists.

Proposal to amend para. 0. to extend application to vehicles of category Y, amend para. 1.4. to exclude category Y vehicles and certain category N₁ vehicles, add definitions and clarifications for category Y vehicles in paras. 2.8., 2.22., 2.29., 2.32., 2.44., and 2.45., and replace wording in para. 5.3.1.2. concerning Automated Driving System activation and delete footnote 9.

Proposal to insert a new introduction para. 0. to account for vehicles of categories X and Y equipped with an Automated Driving System (ADS), amend footnote 1 in sections 0. and 1. to reference the Consolidated Resolution on the Construction of Vehicles (R.E.3.), document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/78/Rev.8, and amend para. 6.1.5. to clarify that the exemption for damaged driver assistance system sensors does not apply to vehicles of categories X and Y or automated driving systems unless the ADS performance of the DDT is not affected.

Proposal to amend para. 0. to extend application to vehicles of category Y, amend para. 1.4. to clarify non-applicability to category Y vehicles, add provisions to paras. 2.8., 2.22., 2.29., 2.32., 2.44., and 2.45. defining terms and test areas for category Y vehicles without windscreens, and replace language in para. 5.3.1.2. regarding Automated Driving System activity and delete footnote 9.

Document presents candidate amendments for ADS Regulation Phase 2 addressing Safety Management System and in-service monitoring and reporting. Proposes:

• An emergency recovery plan for fleet-level failures,
• Harmonization of SMS audit provisions and certificate mutual recognition,
• Split of operational and design responsibilities between operators and manufacturers,
• Refinement of occurrence classes with objective measurable criteria,
• Delta-V thresholds for all vehicle categories in scope,
• Extended reporting templates,
• Leading safety performance indicators,
• Confidentiality rules for ISMR data sharing,
• Explicit feedback loops from findings to corrective action and approval review.

Japan presents a proposed approach to address regulatory provisions for end-to-end (E2E) automated driving systems. E2E technology uses a single AI model to perform the entire driving task from perception to decision-making. While E2E systems offer benefits including flexible responses to traffic situations and reduced deployment costs through lower dependence on high-definition maps, concerns exist regarding their black-box nature, including limited visibility into decision-making processes, challenges with reproducibility, and difficulties with root cause analysis in accident investigations. The proposed approach involves three steps: identifying key issues related to E2E automated driving, discussing and organizing identified issues including possible E2E-specific requirements, and considering concrete amendment of provisions based on conclusions reached.

Analysis of terminology related to remote support for automated driving systems, grouping terms into four categories: remote termination, remote fleet management, remote assistance, and remote driving. Remote termination disables ADS features until rescinded. Remote fleet management involves observation without performing the dynamic driving task. Remote assistance provides information while ADS continues the dynamic driving task. Remote driving involves a remote user performing the dynamic driving task. Document proposes agreeing on categories, determining definitions, developing a supplement without new requirements, and potentially developing proposals for new requirements covering ADS performance when expected remote support is not provided and further consideration of remote assistance.

Proposal to modify para. 4.2.2.3.8.1 to add a requirement that a user be in a physical position to operate the driving controls, to allow gaze to be directed to multiple driving task-relevant areas rather than a single area, and to add a requirement that the user have demonstrated an appropriate response to transition of control.

Document identifies open questions regarding MRC definition, risk assessment, feature deactivation, and post-MRC obligations. Discusses reasons for MRC including collisions, faults, remote termination, ODD exits, and fallback user transition failures. Addresses post-MRC reporting and data recording under DSSAD and ISMR. Examines feature deactivation following MRC and ODD exit scenarios, with three possible solutions for ADSF-2 post-ODD exit recording.

Notes from the 3rd meeting of the IWG on Advanced Emergency Braking System, held online 24–25 September 2026. The group reviewed accidentology data showing that 60–70% of pedestrian accidents occur at night, discussed existing regulations including China’s GB 39901-2025 mandatory standard for M₁ and N₁ vehicles entering into force in 2028, and compared Euro NCAP and JNCAP night-time testing protocols. The group agreed to use a homework list as discussion baseline at the next meeting in Tokyo before amending UN R152 text to include requirements for pedestrian collision scenarios at night with artificial lighting.

Proposal to clarify that the ADS must respond to user requests to deactivate, require multimodal signals at the start of and during deactivation procedures that continue until completion or termination, require escalation of warnings for system-initiated deactivations if the user is not re-engaging as expected, require gradual reduction of ADS control action during deactivation while maintaining safe vehicle control, allow the ADS to retake full control if the vehicle is not being controlled safely, terminate the deactivation procedure if the user is not suitably engaged and the time available to transition has expired, replace the requirement for contact with the steering wheel with being in a physical position to operate the driving controls, suspend non-driving related activities at the start of the deactivation procedure, and modify the DDT section to require fallback to an MRC instead of a deactivation procedure if there is insufficient time for transition.

Task force in-session amendments to the proposal to insert a new introduction paragraph accounting for vehicles of category X and Y, amend para. 6.1.5. to clarify that the exemption for driver assistance systems does not fully apply to automated driving systems where the perception system forms part of the driving function, and make editorial improvements replacing ‘disoriented’ with ‘misaligned’ and ‘driver assist systems’ with ‘driver assistance systems’. The amendment enables application of UN R42 to vehicles equipped with an Automated Driving System.

Task force in-session amendments to the proposal to amend para. 0. to introduce provisions for vehicles of category Y and Automated Driving Systems, amend para. 1.4. to exclude category Y vehicles and exempt certain category N₁ vehicles, add sentences to paras. 2.8., 2.22., 2.29., 2.32., 2.45. defining or clarifying applicability for category Y vehicles, amend para. 2.44. to define windscreen test area for category Y vehicles without windscreens, and replace language in para. 5.3.1.2. to refer to active ADS rather than ADS performing the Dynamic Driving Task.

Draft agenda for the fourth session of the Informal Working Group on Advanced Emergency Braking System, to be held 2–4 November 2026 in Tokyo. The meeting will address approval of the agenda and previous report, exchange of positions on requirements in principle, draft state-of-the-art performance requirements for collision scenarios involving pedestrians at night including test procedure and accidentology, nominal avoidance speed and current AEBS status, and conclusion for discussion of performance requirements.

Safety Performance Indicators (SPIs) are measurable metrics monitoring and evaluating ADS safety in operation, including lagging indicators recording outcomes like crashes and injuries, and leading indicators capturing precursors like near misses and risky behaviours. Research tested time-based and distance-based SPIs on the SHRP2 dataset containing 1402 crashes and 5262 near-crashes, achieving Area Under the Curve values of 0.883 for Distance Headway and 0.832 for Time-to-Collision in distinguishing crashes from normal driving. SPIs support safety cases, in-service monitoring and reporting requirements, and continuous ADS deployment monitoring, with future work extending analysis to additional datasets and field data collection.

NHTSA announced activity to update voluntary guidance on automated driving systems. A Federal Register Notice published July 31, 2026 opened a docket to solicit comment on proposed topics for guidance development. NHTSA intends to release draft guidance documents on individual topics as chapters and consolidate them into a final updated guidance document. The public comment period is scheduled to close July 31, 2027 and may be extended. Potential chapters address Emergency Responder Interactions, Safety Management System, Remote Assistance and Operational Oversight, Safety Case, Adherence to Multi-Jurisdictional Laws, Work Zone Operations, ADS System Capabilities and Behavioral Competencies, Verification and Validation with Advanced Testing Methodologies, Considerations for Driverless Deployment, Crashworthiness, Post-Crash Behavior, Human Machine Interface, Accessible Design, Data Monitoring Capture Reporting and Governance, and Maintenance Fleet Operations Continuous Safety Monitoring and Post-Deployment Enhancement.

Minutes of the twelfth meeting of the IWG on EV/HFCV Retrofit Systems held 28 September 2026. The group adopted the provisional agenda and reviewed the work program, aiming to provide GRPE with a first draft of a future UN Regulation by 14–16 October 2026. The group focused on revising definitions in the draft UN Regulation, particularly EPRS definition, EPRS type, vehicle family, and installer provisions. Key unresolved issues include which components must remain identical within an approved type, alternative ways of grouping vehicles within a family, whether installer requirements should be included in the UN Regulation, and the scope regarding vehicles subject to UN Regulations Nos. 155 and 156.

Agenda for the 22nd ADS informal working group session and the 20th GRVA Workshop on ADS, held 6-9 October 2026 in Sydney, Australia. Day 1 covers welcome, agenda adoption, status of work, GRVA highlights, Guidance and Interpretation Document, ADS Phase 2 context, and review of Phase 2 programme proposals. Day 2 addresses refinement of Phase 2 tasks, Australia’s proposed framework, allocation of work items, and integration into 2026-2029 strategy. Day 3 includes ADS2 schedule, coordination with other groups, and GTR, UNR, and GID change requests. Day 4 covers next steps and first ADS2 IWG session logistics for December in The Hague.